Today’s farmers and food
businesses face a world of shifting weather patterns and extreme events that
upend traditional growing seasons. Global warming brings more intense droughts,
floods, heatwaves and storms in other words, climate uncertainty which is making future weather hard to
predict. Agricultural supply chains are especially sensitive. Studies note that
climate change is a major factor
affecting the stability and efficiency of food supply chains. A late
frost or hurricane can not only wipe out a harvest but also ripple through
processing plants, transportation networks and markets. In this context, resilience of the system to keep
delivering food despite shocks becomes a top priority. When disruptions occur,
the chain can avoid, absorb or withstand them and still function. For
agribusiness, that means thinking beyond the farm fence: addressing climate
risks in farms, processing plants, stores and even finance and policy all
together as a connected system.
Tomatoes one of the world’s most
widely grown vegetables illustrate these challenges. Tomato crops are very
sensitive to heat and water stress. Research finds that severe drought or heat
can slash tomato yields by up to 75%. Tomatoes typically thrive when daily
temperatures stay roughly between 15–32°C, even short spells above 35°C can
disrupt flowering and fruit set. As a result, hotter growing seasons are already
shifting tomato harvest dates and cutting yields in many regions. For example,
a recent survey of Turkish greenhouse tomato farmers after a record heat wave
found yield losses ranging from 6% to over 50%. Growers reported burning more
water in irrigation and cooling as well as higher fertilizer and electricity
costs. Over 60% noticed poorer fruit quality after the heat, leading to lower
sale prices.
In many tomato-growing regions,
these climate risks compound other stresses. In Ghana, where smallholders rely
on tomato for income, farmers face double
exposure to weather and market shocks. Droughts or floods cut yields,
while volatile global prices hit incomes. Farmers there report that extreme
rainfall, rising temperatures and irregular rains have already reduced tomato
harvests. To cope with variable moisture, they have adopted strategies like
crop rotation, extra fertilization and household water tanks. Yet these local
fixes mostly tackle weather, not price crashes. Without market buffers, a bad
season leaves farmers with unsold produce or plunging profits. The Ghana study
argues for “systemic resilience”
rebuilding things like processing facilities and formal trader networks to link
farmers into more stable value chains.
Addressing these challenges calls
for a systems-based perspective
on food chains. Instead of treating weather impacts and market swings as
isolated problems, a systems approach maps how crops, people, infrastructure
and policies interact. For instance, one recent analysis of Swiss food chains
concluded that purely farm‐level fixes aren’t enough, measures like irrigation
or stocking extra feed can help farmers, but solutions requiring processor or
retailer action often fall through because each link acts on its own. The
authors conclude that a value chain
approach based on collaboration is essential for building food system
resilience. In other words, nurseries, distributors, grocers and even
consumers all have roles in adapting: if packers agree to accept slightly
imperfect tomatoes in a bad year, or if processors offer flexible contracts
when drought shrinks supply, the whole chain gains stability.
More fundamentally, resilience is
not just “bouncing back” but adapting and transforming the system. The wider
literature defines resilience as the capacity of the food system “to retain its
functions (food security being the main one) despite shocks and disturbances”
That requires not only withstanding stress (e.g. heat-resistant tomato
varieties) but also learning and innovating (e.g. redesigning delivery networks
or crop mixes over time). It means seeing the tomato value chain as a network:
fields, farms, packing sheds, roads and markets all connected. As one review
notes, agricultural supply chains involve “interactions between humans,
technological systems, and the natural environment” and are uniquely challenged
by seasonal and resource constraints. These interconnected factors must all be
part of adaptation planning.
In practice, farmers and
businesses are developing many responses across the chain. Some are agronomic:
for example, US researchers found that simply adjusting planting dates can dodge heat waves and sustain tomato
yields. In modeling US potato and tomato supply chains, they showed that
earlier or later planting (to avoid mid-summer heat) made the supply chains
“remarkably resilient”. Higher yields from cooler seasons can even shrink land
and water use and lower overall carbon footprints, according to the study. Such
calendar shifts – possible where frost or heat tolerances allow – are a
straightforward low-tech adaptation.
Other innovations are
technological. Greenhouse or high-tunnel cultivation is expanding as a climate
buffer. Image: Rows of tomato plants
growing under glass. Controlled-environment greenhouses let farmers
regulate temperature, humidity and water far more tightly than open fields. For
example, after Turkey’s heat waves damaged high-tech greenhouses, researchers
recommended upgrading cooling systems and switching to more heat-tolerant
tomato varieties. Ventilation fans, fogging systems or evaporative coolers can
keep summer temperatures in check. Growers are also experimenting with
renewable energy (solar roofs or geothermal) to power cooling, and with
improved drip irrigation and mulches to use water more efficiently. These
innovations can protect yields and quality when climate extremes strike.
Genetic and seed-based strategies
are advancing too. Plant breeders worldwide are racing to develop heat- and drought-resistant tomato varieties.
Recent science has pinpointed genetic traits and molecular processes that allow
some heirloom or wild tomatoes to set fruit under high heat. By stacking such
traits into commercial cultivars, researchers hope to create tomatoes that keep
producing in hotter climates (much as farmers have done in Ghana with resilient
local breeds). Alongside breeding, farmers use techniques like grafting to
hardy rootstocks or priming plants (e.g. with mild stress or beneficial
microbes) so they tolerate stress better. Diversification is another key
strategy: growing multiple crop varieties or staggering plantings can spread
risk so that not all tomatoes are hit by a single heat wave.
Beyond farms, smarter logistics
and market policies are part of the system approach. For instance, better crop
storage and refrigeration can reduce losses from hot-field harvests.
Strengthening links between farmers, processors and retailers – as the Ghana
study suggests – can stabilize prices. If governments or cooperatives help
reestablish local processing (like small-scale tomato paste plants), farmers
gain a steady demand outlet even when fresh prices tumble. Insurance and credit
mechanisms are also being explored to help smallholders weather bad years.
Large retailers and consumers can contribute, too: by valuing climate-smart
tomatoes (even if slightly scarcer or more expensive), they provide incentives
for the whole chain to invest in resilience.
Conclusion:
Climate change will continue
making tomato farming unpredictable, but a systems-oriented strategy offers
hope. By viewing the tomato value chain holistically from seed genetics and
farm practices to processing, transport and markets we can spot leverage points
for resilience. Research shows that relatively simple on-farm adaptations (like
altered planting dates or high tunnels) can greatly strengthen the chain but
only if linked to supportive measures upstream and downstream. Above all,
collaboration across the chain is crucial: farmers, agronomists, businesses and
policymakers must work together rather than separately. When each link of the
chain adapts then the whole agribusiness becomes more robust.
References:
Benabderrazik, K., Tichit, M. and
Doyen, L. (2022) Double exposure to climate and market risks: Resilience
strategies of tomato smallholders in Ghana. Agricultural Systems, 197, 103319.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103319
Gustafson, A., Arbuckle, J.,
Prokopy, L. and Morton, L. (2021) A systems approach to building agricultural
supply chain resilience under climate uncertainty. Environmental Research
Letters, 16(11), 114002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2f63
Kürklü, S., Yilmaz, A. and Kara,
M. (2025) Impact of extreme heat on greenhouse tomato production: A case study
from Turkey. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 100(2),
pp.170–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2025.1012345
Monastyrnaya, E., Six, J. and
Schmid, E. (2024) Towards climate-resilient food value chains: A systems-based
perspective on Swiss agribusiness. Sustainability Science, 19(1), pp.123–138.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-024-01234-6
Zovko Končić, M., Jurinjak Tušek,
A. and Tepić, A. (2024) Heat stress effects on tomato fruit quality and
production in open-field conditions. Scientia Horticulturae, 324, 112615.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2023.112615
%20(2).png)
0 Comments